International journalist-author, Pierre van Paassen, weaves together a lifetime of phantasmagorical personal stories, ostentatious tall tales and deliciously embellished memories as a travel corespondent in his epic memoirs, 'To Number Our Days' (405 pages), published in 1964 by Charles Scribner's Sons, New York.

Historical Notability

Pierre van Paassen is most often cited post-1964, for his unverifiable claim that in 1922, while he was investigating the Leo Frank case files at the Fulton County Superior Courthouse of Atlanta, Georgia, he made an incredible discovery of a shief containing human flesh X-rays and dental photographs from 1913, concealed evidence unequivocally proving Leo Frank was actually innocent of raping and strangling Mary Phagan.

Frankites: Leo Frank's Defenders

Several of the most notable Leo Frank partisan authors (Steve Oney, Leonard Dinnerstein, Elaine Marie Alphin, Jeffrey Paul Melnick and others) cite Pierre van Paassen's alleged earth-shattering discovery as ineluctable proof that posthumously exonerates Leo M. Frank, who they believe, was wrongfully convicted in 1913 of Phagan's murder.

Leo Frank's Detractors

Leo Frank detractors have described Pierre van Paassen's newfangled evidence as an incredulous fraud, dubbing it, "The Mary Phagan Bitemark Hoax", because they believe this dubious material was never mentioned in any of the legal proceedings or hearings concerning Leo Frank's trial and appeals between 1913 to 1915, nor was the subject ever broached or taken seriously by legal scholars during efforts to obtain a posthumous pardon for Frank between the years 1982 to 1986. Moreover, they say, Pierre van Paassen is the only person who ever claims to have seen these non-existent photo medical records.

Excerpt that discusses the case of Leo Frank and Van Paassen's discovery of photographic evidence, pages 237 and 238:

The Jewish community of Atlanta at that time seemed to live under a cloud. Several years previously one of its members, Leo Frank, had been lynched as he was being transferred from the Fulton Tower Prison in Atlanta to Milledgeville for trial on a charge of having raped and murdered a little girl in his warehouse which stood right opposite the Constitution building. Many Jewish citizens who recalled the lynching were unanimous in assuring me that Frank was innocent of the crime.

I took to reading all the evidence pro and con in the record department at the courthouse. Before long I came upon an envelope containing a sheaf of papers and a number of X-ray photographs showing teeth indentures. The murdered girl had been bitten on the left shoulder and neck before being strangled. But the X-ray photos of the teeth marks on her body did not correspond with Leo Frank’s set of teeth of which several photos were included. If those photos had been published at the time of the murder, as they should have been, the lynching would probably not have taken place.

Though, as I said, the man died several years before, it was not too late, I thought, to rehabilitate his memory and perhaps restore the good name of his family. I showed Clark Howell the evidence establishing Frank’s innocence and asked permission to run a series of articles dealing with the case and especially with the evidence just uncovered. Mr. Howell immediately concurred, but the most prominent Jewish lawyer in the city, Mr. Harry Alexander, whom I consulted with a view to have him present the evidence to the grand jury, demurred. He said Frank had not even been tried. Hence no new trial could be requested. Moreover, the Jewish community in its entirety still felt nervous about the incident. If I wrote the articles old resentments might be stirred up and, who knows, some of the unknown lynchers might recognize themselves as participants in my description of the lynching. It was better, Mr. Alexander thought, to leave sleeping lions alone. Some local rabbis were drawn into the discussion and they actually pleaded with Clark Howell to stop me from reviving interest in the Frank case as this was bound to have evil repercussions on the Jewish community.

That someone had blabbed out of school became quite evident when I received a printed warning saying: "Lay off the Frank case if you want to keep healthy." The unsigned warning was reinforced one night or, rather, early one morning when I was driving home. A large automobile drove up alongside of me and forced me into the track of a fast-moving streetcar coming from the opposite direction. My car was demolished, but I escaped without a scratch....

Source: To Number Our Days by Pierre van Paassen (see pages 237, 238 about the Leo Frank case):
WWW: http://archive.org/details/ToNumberOurDaysByPierreVanPaassen

Scholarly debunking of the Mary Phagan bitemark hoax

In reality, X-ray technology was in its infancy in 1913, and it was never possible to X-ray bite marks on skin in 1913 or today (ask any X-ray technician). Vehicles had virtually no safety features to speak of in 1922, so the chances of someone walking away “without a scratch” from a head-on collision is a bald-faced lie. Was Leo Frank’s appeals attorney named “Harry Alexander” (false) or Henry Alexander (correct)? Leo Frank was not lynched on his way to his murder trial in 1913. He was tried and sentenced to death by Judge Leonard Strickland Roan on August 26, 1913. The hanging took place nearly two years later on August 17, 1915. Leo Frank went on trial in Atlanta, not 170 miles away in Milledgeville where the hoaxer suggests the trial was scheduled.

Oddly enough, even though the 'Mary Phagan bitemark hoax' has been thoroughly debunked by modern scholars and forensic scientists, 21st century efforts by primarily Jewish activists and lesser extent Gentile liberals, to exonerate Leo Frank with fabricated evidence in the popular culture, continue citing the disingenuous rumors created by Pierre van Paassen as evidence of Leo Frank's innocence.

Further Reading:

Leonard Dinnerstein (born May 5, 1934) completed his Ph.D., Dissertation in History on the Leo Max Frank Case (1966) for the Political Science Department of Columbia University. One of the central themes of his dissertation is Anti-Semitism was responsible for railroading an innocent Jewish man, who was convicted for the murder of Mary Phagan in 1913. Dinnerstein's dissertation became the species for his book, "The Leo Frank Case", which would go through a number of editions in its evolution beginning in 1968 when the first edition was released.

1. Leo Frank and the American Jewish Community (1968) by Leonard Dinnerstein: http://archive.org/details/LeoFrankAndTheAmericanJewishCommunity

2. Dinnerstein, Leonard (1966) Leo Frank Case PhD Dissertation in History for the Political Science Department of Columbia University: http://www.archive.org/details/TheLeoFrankCase1966Dissertation

3. The Leo Frank Case Book (published 1968 and thereafter): http://www.archive.org/details/TheLeoFrankCaseByLeonardDinnerstein

4. To Number Our Days by Pierre van Paassen (see pages 237, 238 about the Leo Frank case): http://archive.org/details/ToNumberOurDaysByPierreVanPaassen

5. The Elusive Leo Frank Case Georgia Supreme Court Case Records Archive (1,800 pages). http://archive.org/details/leo-frank-georgia-supreme-court-case-records-1913-1914

The most reliable primary and secondary sources about Mary Phagan's murder, Leo Frank's trial, appeals and aftermath.

1. The Murder of Little Mary Phagan by Mary Phagan Kean (b. June 5, 1954) was written by the namesake and grandniece of Mary Phagan (1899 - 1913) -- the little girl who was murdered on Georgia Confederate Memorial Day, April 26, 1913. Phagan-Kean produces a rare neutral account of the Mary Phagan murder investigation, coroner's inquest, grandjury indictment, and trial of Leo Frank, including the appeals (1913-1915) and aftermath of the case (1982-1986), that is engaging and well worth reading. Phagan-Kean's book is a very refreshing change from the endless number of contemporary books written by Leo Frank activists over the generations who quote and plagiarize other Leo Frank activists' academic dishonesty and falsified research, to create an artificial consensus of history that Leo Frank was innocent. For more than one hundred years Leo Frank activists have relied upon using fallacious evidence and fabrication about the Leo Frank case to racistly transform the 1913 affair into an anti-Gentile ethno-religious conspiracy.

2. American State Trials, volume X (1918) by John Davison Lawson LLD (Available here on www.Archive.org) the review tends to favor Leo Frank and his legal defense team, because the document provides an abridged version of the trial testimony, redacting and leaving out some very important details damaging to Leo Frank.

Be sure to read the abridged closing arguments of Hugh Dorsey, Frank Arthur Hooper, Luther Rosser and Reuben Rose Arnold. A chronology of Leo Frank's appeals is also included. The last segment provides a detailed account of Leo Frank's lynching.

For a much clearer picture of the trial testimony, read the elusive Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence (BOE, 1913) for the official version of the trial testimony. Compare the American State Trials Volume X 1918 version of the BOE with the official record of the Leo Frank trial brief of evidence (1913) to see what was left out (the juiciest stuff) from the American State Trials Volume X, 1918.

3. Argument of Hugh M. Dorsey in the Trial of Leo Frank (Available here on www.Archive.org). Some but not all of the 9 hours of arguments given to the jury at the end of the Leo Frank trial on August 22nd, 23rd, and 25th of 1913 (the 24th was Sunday). Very few libraries in the United States have original copies of this books. There has been an effort over the last 100 years to steal and destroy the remaining copies so as to suppress Hugh Dorsey's closing arguments and peroration.

This excellent book is required reading to see how the prosecutor Hugh Dorsey in sales vernacular: "closed", a Jury panel of 13 men, made up of a judge with a reputation for conscientiousness, along with a jury of 12 men.

On appeals Leo Frank's defense team submitted a petition to judge Roan on 107 grounds for why Leo Frank should get a new trial -- every single ground was rejected with an explanation on October 31, 1913. Judge Roans rejection of each and every one of the 107 grounds put before him, causes most 20th and 21st century neutral observers to realize the judge's appeasing oral remarks to his former law-partner Luther Rosser about questions of Leo Frank's "innocence or guilt" were nothing more of a business courtesy, than an expression of doubt.

At a later time after state appeals to the Georgia Supreme Court failed, Superior Court Judge Benjamin Hill on March 7th, 1914, scheduled Leo Frank to hang on his 30th birthday April 17, 1914, revealing the ultimate truth and strength of his verdict.

4. Leo M. Frank, Plaintiff in Error, vs. State of Georgia, Defendant in Error. In Error from Fulton Superior Court at the July Term 1913, Brief of Evidence. Extremely rare, only 3 original copies exist, and they are held at the Georgia State Archive (The unabridged version is available on www.archive.org the version in American State Trials Volume X, 1918 is abridged).

Three Major Atlanta Dailies: The Atlanta Constitution, The Atlanta Journal, The Atlanta Georgian (Hearst's Tabloid Yellow Journalism), The most relevant issues center around April 28th to August 27th 1913.

5. Atlanta Constitution Newspaper: The Murder of Mary Phagan, Coroner's Inquest, Grand Jury, Investigation, Trail, Appeals, Shanking and Lynching of Leo Frank Case in the Atlanta Constitution Newspaper from 1913 to 1915.
Link: http://archive.org/details/LeoFrankCaseInTheAtlantaConstitutionNewspaper1913To1915

6. The Atlanta Georgian newspaper: This selection is covering the Leo Frank Case from April though August, 1913.
Link: http://archive.org/details/AtlantaGeorgianNewspaperAprilToAugust1913

7. The Atlanta Journal Newspaper, April, 28, 1913, through till the end of August, 1913, pertaining to the Leo Frank Case:
Link: http://archive.org/details/AtlantaJournalApril281913toAugust311913

Leo Frank confirms in a jailhouse interview that he might have been in the men's toilet in the metal room (shockingly the prosecution's theory where the murder occurred) at the time Monteen Stover said his office was empty between 12:05 p.m. and 12:10 p.m.
Link: Atlanta Constitution, Monday, March 9, 1914, Leo Frank Jailhouse Interview

8. Tom Watson's Jeffersonian and Watson's Magazine: Watson's Magazine, January 1915, Watson's Magazine, March 1915; Watson's Magazine, August 1915, Watson's Magazine, September 1915, and Watson's Magazine, October of 1915. (Available here on www.Archive.org). Tom Watson's best work on the Leo M. Frank case was published in August and September of 1915. Watson's five works written collectively on the Leo M. Frank topic, provide logical arguments confirming the guilt of Leo M. Frank with superb reasoning. Originals of these magazines are extremely rare and very difficult to find.

1. The Leo Frank Case By Tom Watson (January 1915) Watson's Magazine Volume 20 No. 3. See page 139 for the Leo Frank Case. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga.
Link: http://www.archive.org/details/TheLeoFrankCase

2. The Full Review of the Leo Frank Case By Tom Watson (March 1915) Volume 20. No. 5. See page 235 for 'A Full Review of the Leo Frank Case'. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga..
Link: http://www.archive.org/details/TheFullReviewOfTheLeoFrankCaseMarch1915

3. The Celebrated Case of The State of Georgia vs. Leo Frank By Tom Watson (August 1915) Volumne 21, No 4. See page 182 for 'The Celebrated Case of the State of Georgia vs. Leo Frank". Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga..
Link: http://www.archive.org/details/TheCelebratedCaseOfLeoFrank

4. The Official Record in the Case of Leo Frank, Jew Pervert By Tom Watson (September 1915) Volume 21. No. 5. See page 251 for 'The Official Record in the Case of Leo Frank, Jew Pervert'. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga..
Link: http://www.archive.org/details/TheOfficialRecordInTheCaseOfLeoFrankJewPervertSeptember1915

5. The Rich Jews Indict a State! The Whole South Traduced in the Matter of Leo Frank By Tom Watson (October 1915) Volume 21. No. 6. See page 301. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga..
Link: http://www.archive.org/details/RichJewsIndictTheStateOfGeorgia

Tom Watson's Jeffersonian Newspaper

9. The Tom E. Watson Digital Papers Archive, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill:
Link: http://www.lib.unc.edu/dc/watson

Tom W. Brown

10. Notes on the Case of Leo M. Frank, By Tom W. Brown, Emery University, Atlanta, Georgia, 1982. (despite its errors - like mentioning Mary Phagan had bitemarks on her - it is otherwise a great analysis).
Link: http://archive.org/details/NotesOnTheCaseOfLeoMaxFrankAndItsAftermath

Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court Records (1913, 1914):

11. Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court Records (1,800 pages).
Link: http://archive.org/details/leo-frank-georgia-supreme-court-case-records-1913-1914

comment

Reviews